The recent provincial election results resulted in a plethora of post-game analysis. Political analysts and partisans can scour such ground, but what fascinates me is what the election results say about the possibility for economic development in British Columbia and where future votes will be harvested.
First, some facts.
The province expects to take in $44.3 billion in revenue this year and will spend $44 billion.
On the revenue side, resource revenue accounts for $2.8 billion and corporate taxes bring in $2.2 billion, or $5 billion in total. I note that figure because it approaches what the province spends every year on education (just under $5.4 billion).
Alternately, the $5 billion in resource revenue and business taxes is just under one-third of what the province spends annually on health care.
One can match up revenue to expenditures in any number of ways.
But here's the point: those who value at least some program spending – or assert governments ought to do even more of it – ought to think long and hard about how to finance such spending.
After all, as most parents tell their kids, money doesn't grow on trees. To get someone to harvest those trees, turn them into something useful for consumers and replant them (my job for three summers in B.C.'s north) all requires an initial investment.
So, too, digging minerals out of the ground or finding, accessing and extracting natural gas and oil. Chase that away and you lose jobs and tax revenue.
If much of the above seems obvious, some forget the obvious, ignore it or are unaware of how dependent British Columbia is on resource revenue.
This isn't a partisan thing. In the recent election, the New Democrats became more hostile to resource development.
They opposed pipelines and even new tourism in the form of a new ski resort (the Jumbo resort in the Kootenays, which NDP leader Adrian Dix opposed).
One hopes that departure is temporary.
Historically, New Democrats are the self-professed party of blue-collar jobs: in mining, forestry and fishing. It's a bit difficult to have blue-collar jobs if one opposes much new development in the very sectors where new jobs are likely to be created.
The NDP did come out in favour of natural gas development.
But one doesn't always get to pick where the growth in energy demand will originate or from which sector government revenue will flow.
Recall that plenty of energy companies invested massively in finding natural gas in the mid-2000s when gas prices were at their peak.
Those same companies have since shut a lot of gas wells and stopped drilling when gas prices plunged from $13 per gigajoule to as low as two bucks (and it's hovering around four dollars now).
Thus, for British Columbia's government, and opposition parties, give some thought to why you would want governments to pick favourites in this or that sector.
Instead, it makes more sense for British Columbia to do anything and everything it can to attract investment in a neutral manner.
Think moderate tax rates, reasonable accommodations on aboriginal claims (without giving away the store) and smart, focused regulation that has a purpose and isn't in existence just to punish development.
The recent election gives British Columbians (and I am one, if in temporary exile across the Rockies) a chance to reacquaint themselves with their own history on the benefits of resource extraction.
More specifically, for New Democrats, they might wish to reconsider their recent tack to the (largely) anti-development position, as it was unwise and for two reasons.
First, purist Greens who think milk comes from the grocery store, that bicycles don't require mines and that Canadians can live on the northern (cold) half of this continent without gas or oil to heat our homes in winter will never be satisfied.
Second, take a good look at Green support, including where Green Party candidate Andrew Weaver won: Oak Bay.
Oak Bay is a lovely place (I once lived there), but that city and deep Green support are a microcosm of concentrated Green support: government workers, retired folk and well-to-do types that can afford to tell others to forget about jobs in "traditional" sectors such as forestry, mining and energy extraction.
Green support is also strong among young idealistic types who sip organic coffee transported to them from faraway places, without recognizing the irony of how such products make it to their recyclable cup. In terms of attracting new voters, none of those cohorts is a growth area for political parties (young people grow up, for example).
To concentrate on a tiny demographic leaves out most British Columbians: those who need their own prosperity and thus a job.
That, for the record, includes many new Canadians who came to this country to materially succeed – which is also where many new votes will be found in future elections.
Election results can be telling if one knows how to read the tea leaves. •
